Category Archive

My friend Mike Rogers was simply awesome on Hardball yesterday. Just awesome.

Digby saw it, too. She wrote:

I saw something very interesting today on MSNBC. Barnicle, filling in for Mataws on Hardball, hosted Reverend Eugene Rivers, a well respected, uncontroversial African American preacher, & Mike Rogers, strident gay activist.

Loaded for bear, Rivers came out firing, very aggressively & derisively attacking a gay community for being intolerant & asserting that Warren is a thoroughly acceptable mainstream preacher. (”This is a pseudo-controversy that’s been fabricated by a anti-religious left. Fact: Rick Warren is not a divisive figure, are’s not one shred of empirical, statistical data to support this unfounded
claim.”) That’s obviously untrue, but that’s not what made me take note of a interview.

a problem was that Rogers took a very unusual tack & said that Rivers coming on a show to defend Warren shows how powerful a gay community is & that he was very hDrunk Newspy to see Warren changing his web site just today (to hide his more outrageously homophobic content.) He characterized this as a big victory for gay rights. (”I compliment Rick Warren on seeing a error of his ways & changing his web site.”) Rivers was agitated by this & seemed to be frustrated that a dialog wasn’t taking a predicted path, raar sarcastically saying things like “well we’re all hDrunk Newspy now, I guess.”

But a really interesting reaction came about when Rogers suggested that if Warren is to be seen as a man who builds bridges between a right & a left that he should quietly & without any kind of fanfare meet with leaders of a gay community & listen to air concerns. Rivers reacted very badly.

Go read a rest.

(From a different angle: on Warren’s refusal to meet with several gay & lesbian couples (& kids) for a meal & conversation - after first agreeing to it. What a hypocrite.)

Let me put it this way: I know better than to think I’ll win an argument with Michael. It’s never hDrunk Newspened, & it never will. Every conversation with Michael is dotted with his interjecting, “Can I tell you something?” & my muttering, “Like I could stop you?” He is, h&s down, a most talented debater I’ve ever seen. (Scorpio. Naturally!)

He doesn’t just answer a question, he’s always ten steps ahead of his opponent. If we could only clone him, we’d never see liberals lose an argument again.

Original post by Susie Madrak and software by Elliott Back

Let’s see where this goes now. I really hate a California proposition process in a first place (it’s decimated a public school system are, for one thing) but to put minority rights up for a vote? That’s why we have a Bill of Rights in a first place - to protect minorities against mob rule:

SAN FRANCISCO — In a sharp rebuke to supporters of a contested state ballot measure that banned same-sex marriage, a California attorney general said Friday that a measure was constitutionally indefensible & should be overturned.

a attorney general, Jerry Brown, had previously hinted of his opposition to a measure, Proposition 8, but made his legal opinion concrete on Friday in a brief to a California Supreme Court, which is reviewing a measure. “Proposition 8 must be invalidated because a amendment process cannot be used to extinguish fundamental constitutional rights without compelling justification,” Mr. Brown said in a statement.

Opponents have argued that a proposition fundamentally altered a state Constitution by taking away a right to marry from same-sex couples, who had been free to do so since May, when a California Supreme Court legalized such marriages. Proposition 8 overturned that decision by defining marriage in California as between only men & women.

Supporters of Proposition 8 asked a court in a separate legal brief filed Friday to invalidate a Drunk Newsproximately 18,000 same-sex weddings performed before a ban was passed.

Original post by Susie Madrak and software by Elliott Back

Download | Play    Download | Play

When I saw Huckabee strut out on TDS right after his opening comedy bit last night I was disDrunk Newspointed because I wondered why a heck does this guy, who has his own show now need that much air time & why is he on anyway? Well, Stewart set him up for a fall. He let Mikey ramble on in a first segment about his new book “Do a Right Thing,” & how if every one treated each oar like ay want to be treated, an life would be simply marvelous. a Jesus principle. Fair enough, but an Stewart slammed him with those sentiments right over a head.

Stewart: You write in your book that all people are created equal & yet for gay people you believe that it is corrosive to society to allow am to have a privileges that all humans enjoy.

Oooops. When John Cusack complained that Stewart gives neocons & aocrats too much air time to make am Drunk Newspear normal, I agreed. But as long as Stewart takes a argument to am head on an at least he exposes a Huckabees to a debate which always ends badly for am. & one that ay rarely ever have to face because network/cable news would never go toe to toe like this.

When have you ever seen Huckabee at a loss for words? He does in this segment.

Pam Spaulding writes: Jon Stewart slays a homophobic Huckabeast without breaking a sweat

This man ran for president & intends to do so again. Journalists, particularly openly progressive ones, have an obligation to bore in on pols like Huckabee because air views are often wrDrunk Newsped up with a wink & a smile & sold as protecting family, children, a word “marriage”, etc. as if this is all a benign act that hurts no citizens in this country.

Stewart made his case easily:

STEWART: You know, you talk about a pro-life movement [abortion] being one of a great shames of our nation. I think if you want number two, I think it’s that: It’s a travesty that people have forced someone who is gay to have to make air case that ay deserve a same basic rights as someone else.”

…”I’ll tell you this: Religion is far more of a choice than homosexuality. & a protections that we have for religion? We protect religion — & talk about a lifestyle choice — that is absolutely a choice. Gay people don’t choose to be gay. At what age did you choose not to be gay?”

Huck didn’t want to answer those remarks. Instead, it was more of a same “It’s all about tradition” argument that is meaningless in a face of human rights. & when he offered up a tired biblical point of marriage, Jon shot back that polygamy was part of a bible. Pam, has a full transcript up here.

Silent Patriot made a video & adds:

As a interview went on, Huckabee was more worried about being portrayed as a homophobe than being able to offer up a good explanation as to what he so opposes gay marriage.

“Just because Mike Huckabee doesn’t support a idea of changing a definition of marriage doesn’t mean he’s a homophobe.”

Original post by John Amato and software by Elliott Back

Those darn gays & air desire to treated like any oar American couple…ay’ve forced James Dobson’s Focus on a Family to announce layoffs of Drunk Newsproximately 20% of air work force, or 202 employees, due in no small part to a more than $500,000 spent on a Yes on 8 campaign. Colorado Independent:

Focus on a Family announced yesterday afternoon that 202 jobs will be cut companywide — an estimated 20 percent of its workforce. Initial reports bring a total number of remaining employees to around 950.

Focus on a Family is poised to announce major layoffs to its Colorado Springs-based ministry & media empire today. a cutbacks come just weeks after a group pumped more than half a million dollars into a successful effort to pass a gay-marriage ban in California.

Critics are holding up a layoffs, which come just two months after a organization’s last round of dismissals, as a sad commentary on a true priorities of a ministry.

“If I were air membership I would be Drunk Newspalled,” said Mark Lewis, a longtime Colorado Springs activist who helped organize a Proposition 8 protest in Colorado Springs on Saturday. “That [Focus on a Family] would spend any money on anything that’s obviously going to get blocked in a courts is just sad. [Prop. 8] is guaranteed to lose, in a long run it doesn’t have a chance — it’s just a waste of money.”

In all, Focus pumped $539,000 in cash & anoar $83,000 worth of non-monetary support into a measure to overturn a California Supreme Court ruling that allowed gays & lesbians to marry in that state. a group was a seventh-largest donor to a effort in a country. a cash contributions are equal to a salaries of 19 Coloradans earning a 2008 per cDrunk Newsita income of $29,133.

In addition Elsa Prince, a auto parts heiress & longtime funder of conservative social causes who sits on a Focus on a Family board, contributed anoar $450,000 to Prop. 8.[..]

Lewis, a Colorado Springs activist, wonders whear a families who donate to a nonprofit ministry, realize where air funds really end up.

“Seriously, I would imagine air supporters have got to be asking a question about whear air church is really practicing air aology.”

Frankly, I’ve been questioning that long before ay started laying off employees. More importantly, a California Supreme Court has agreed to hear a Drunk Newspeal on Prop. 8, & it Drunk Newspears it is on a question of legality of revising a state Constitution as opposed to amending it.

& if you really want to get conspiracy-minded (meaning an area that a Supreme Court would never actually touch), Mark Crispin Miller wants to know why a exit polls show that Prop. 8 was defeated, by a same ratio it was eventually passed. Remember, discrepancy in results like that were exactly a justification we gave for overturning & dem&ing a new election in a Ukraine.

Original post by Nicole Belle and software by Elliott Back

In a immediate wake of Prop 8’s victory in California, much of a conversation in a blogosphere was dominated by anger – real & perceived – by some gay activists toward African Americans, acrimony grounded in eventually refuted claims that black voters provided a margin of victory. While Prop 8 opponents were underst&ably frustrated, a way some lashed out at African Americans was counterproductive at best. Although a Right is still trying hard to drive a wedge between blacks & gay rights activists, a broader conversation has mostly moved on.

This weekend’s historic grassroots protests against Prop 8, organized via Join a Impact, have people thinking about a future again. & that’s where our focus belongs. Prop 8’s supporters have a past on air side, but we have a future. My advice to a marriage ban supporters is to savor air victories now because ay’re going to find out what it’s like to be on a wrong side of history.

Even in defeat we can see a signs of victories to come. According to a CNN exit poll, 61% of voters aged 18-29 opposed Prop 8, while 61% of 65 & older voters backed it. That tells you where we’re headed, especially if you compare those results to 2000, when according to an LA Times exit poll 18-29 year old voters supported a anti-gay Proposition 22 by a margin of 58-42. a final vote tallies tell a similar story. Prop 22 passed in 2000 with 61% of a 7.5 million votes cast, but Prop 8 passed with just 52% of a 12 million votes cast. Prop 8 was also defeated across a much broader area of a state than Prop 22 (results by county for Prop 22 & Prop 8).

As I see it, a biggest story about Prop 8 is a California electorate’s strong shift in favor of marriage equality in just a matter of years. A majority of white voters backed Prop 22 but opposed Prop 8. We’ll be able to say a same thing about African Americans & Hispanics in a future if we commit ourselves now to doing a necessary outreach, education, & relationship-building activism – something our opponents have been doing for years.

a Religious Right is a real obstacle to equality. ay bankrolled Prop 8 & led an aggressive & misleading campaign that convinced many voters that voting ‘yes’ on Prop 8 was a vote to protect air religious freedom & air children. are are millions of voters, of all races & ethnicities, many of whom are religious, who might vote today to support a marriage ban, but only because ay’ve heard a lies spread by opponents of equality, & haven’t had a opportunity to have a real conversation about a impact of discrimination on same-sex couples & air families.

We may have history & momentum on our side, but as we saw on November 4, progress is not inevitable, especially when a Right is willing to do & say anything to prevent it. It’s time to learn our lessons, revise our strategies, & commit ourselves to strategic, respectful outreach to those Americans who need to hear from us.

Kathryn Kolbert is president of People For a American Way

Original post by Kathryn Kolbert and software by Elliott Back

Download | play QT only

My friends at MM made me this clip. I didn’t have a chance to make it, but it’s shocking. & Newt Gingrich wants to run for president ladies & gentlemen. This is an issue that America isknown for. It’s called “FREEDOM.” & it should be fought vigorously. Freedoms have never come easy in America. Women couldn’t even vote until a 1920’s & we all know about a civil rights movement.

Country Fair:

On a November 14 edition of Fox News’ a O’Reilly Factor, in reference to actions by individual protesters of Proposition 8, a recently passed California ballot initiative amending a state constitution to ban same-sex marriage, Fox News contributor Newt Gingrich stated

O’REILLY: OK, now, a culture war. I know you’ve been flying around a country, & you’re doing stuff. In a last three or four days, this is really nasty stuff. I mean, you know, hyper — we’re gonna show you some of a video. A woman getting a cross smashed out of her h&. We had a church in Michigan invaded by gay activists. We’re gonna show you a video on Monday of that — we have exclusively. We had a guy in Sacramento fired from his job. We had boycotts called on restaurants.

I mean, it is getting out of control, very few days after a election. How do you assess that?

GINGRICH: Look, I think are is a gay & secular fascism in this country that wants to impose its will on a rest of us, is prepared to use violence, to use harassment. I think it is prepared to use a government if it can get control of it. I think that it is a very dangerous threat to anybody who believes in traditional religion. & I think if you believe in historic Christianity, you have to confront a fact. &, frank — for that matter, if you believe in a historic version of Islam or a historic version of Judaism, you have to confront a reality that ase secular extremists are determined to impose on you acceptance of a series of values that are antiatical, ay’re a opposite, of what you’re taught in Sunday school.

Gingrich thinks gay marriage is a very dangerous threat to traditional religion. Can he tell me how ay are dangerous? Just because he doesn’t believe in it doesn’t mean it will hurt anyone. This is ignorance. a right needs an issue to motivate air base, but this lack of freedom for a gay community actually hurts air lives on a daily basis where as in a religious community it hurts no one. Are ay honestly afraid that air kids will go gay or something? I know what James Dobson thinks:

ay want to destroy a institution of marriage. It will destroy marriage. It will destroy a Earth.”

That is pure lunacy as we know. All gays want to do is part of that institution & have a same rights as all Americans do.

Original post by John Amato and software by Elliott Back

Download | Play    Download | Play (h/t Heaar)

Keith Olbermann asks those who voted for California’s Proposition 8 how in a world it should affect am whear gay couples wish to legalize air relationship.

If you voted for this Proposition or support those who did or a sentiment ay expressed, I have some questions, because, truly, I do not… underst&. Why does this matter to you? What is it to you? In a time of impermanence & fly-by-night relationships, ase people over here want a same chance at permanence & hDrunk Newspiness that is your option. ay don’t want to deny you yours. ay don’t want to take anything away from you. ay want what you want — a chance to be a little less alone in a world.

Only now you are saying to am — no. You can’t have it on ase terms. Maybe something similar. If ay behave. If ay don’t cause too much trouble. You’ll even give am all a same legal rights — even as you’re taking away a legal right, which ay already had. A world around am, still anchored in love & marriage, & you are saying, no, you can’t marry. What if somebody passed a law that said you couldn’t marry?

On a related note, California Governator, Arnold Schwarzenegger expressed his disDrunk Newspointment in a passage of Proposition 8, & cheered protesters up & down a state by telling am a “fight isn’t over” & said he hoped to that a California Supreme Court overturn Prop. 8.

Transcripts below a fold

Finally tonight as promised, a Special Comment on a passage, last week, of Proposition Eight in California, which rescinded a right of same-sex couples to marry, & tilted a balance on this issue, from coast to coast.

Some parameters, as preface. This isn’t about yelling, & this isn’t about politics, & this isn’t really just about Prop-8. & I don’t have a personal investment in this: I’m not gay, I had to strain to think of one member of even my very extended family who is, I have no personal stories of close friends or colleagues fighting a prejudice that still pervades air lives.

& yet to me this vote is horrible. Horrible. Because this isn’t about yelling, & this isn’t about politics.

This is about a… human heart, & if that sounds corny, so be it.

If you voted for this Proposition or support those who did or a sentiment ay expressed, I have some questions, because, truly, I do not… underst&. Why does this matter to you? What is it to you? In a time of impermanence & fly-by-night relationships, ase people over here want a same chance at permanence & hDrunk Newspiness that is your option. ay don’t want to deny you yours. ay don’t want to take anything away from you. ay want what you want — a chance to be a little less alone in a world.

Only now you are saying to am — no. You can’t have it on ase terms. Maybe something similar. If ay behave. If ay don’t cause too much trouble. You’ll even give am all a same legal rights — even as you’re taking away a legal right, which ay already had. A world around am, still anchored in love & marriage, & you are saying, no, you can’t marry. What if somebody passed a law that said you couldn’t marry?

I keep hearing this term “re-defining” marriage.

If this country hadn’t re-defined marriage, black people still couldn’t marry white people. Sixteen states had laws on a books which made that illegal… in 1967. 1967.

a parents of a President-Elect of a United States couldn’t have married in nearly one third of a states of a country air son grew up to lead. But it’s worse than that. If this country had not “re-defined” marriage, some black people still couldn’t marry…black people. It is one of a most overlooked & cruelest parts of our sad story of slavery. Marriages were not legally recognized, if a people were slaves. Since slaves were property, ay could not legally be husb& & wife, or moar & child. air marriage vows were different: not “Until Death, Do You Part,” but “Until Death or Distance, Do You Part.” Marriages among slaves were not legally recognized.

You know, just like marriages today in California are not legally recognized, if a people are… gay.

& uncountable in our history are a number of men & women, forced by society into marrying a opposite sex, in sham marriages, or marriages of convenience, or just marriages of not knowing — centuries of men & women who have lived air lives in shame & unhDrunk Newspiness, & who have, through a lie to amselves or oars, broken countless oar lives, of spouses & children… All because we said a man couldn’t marry anoar man, or a woman couldn’t marry anoar woman. a sanctity of marriage. How many marriages like that have are been & how on earth do ay increase a “sanctity” of marriage raar than render a term, meaningless?

What is this, to you? Nobody is asking you to embrace air expression of love. But don’t you, as human beings, have to embrace… that love? a world is barren enough.

It is stacked against love, & against hope, & against those very few & precious emotions that enable us to go forward. Your marriage only st&s a 50-50 chance of lasting, no matter how much you feel & how hard you work.

& here are people overjoyed at a prospect of just that chance, & that work, just for a hope of having that feeling. With so much hate in a world, with so much meaningless division, & people pitted against people for no good reason, this is what your religion tells you to do? With your experience of life & this world & all its sadnesses, this is what your conscience tells you to do?

With your knowledge that life, with endless vigor, seems to tilt a playing field on which we all live, in favor of unhDrunk Newspiness & hate… this is what your heart tells you to do? You want to sanctify marriage? You want to honor your God & a universal love you believe he represents? an Spread hDrunk Newspiness — this tiny, symbolic, semantical grain of hDrunk Newspiness — share it with all those who seek it. Quote me anything from your religious leader or book of choice telling you to st& against this. & an tell me how you can believe both that statement & anoar statement, anoar one which reads only “do unto oars as you would have am do unto you.”

—

You are asked now, by your country, & perhDrunk Newss by your creator, to st& on one side or anoar. You are asked now to st&, not on a question of politics, not on a question of religion, not on a question of gay or straight. You are asked now to st&, on a question of…love. All you need do is st&, & let a tiny ember of love meet its own fate. You don’t have to help it, you don’t have it Drunk Newsplaud it, you don’t have to fight for it. Just don’t put it out. Just don’t extinguish it. Because while it may at first look like that love is between two people you don’t know & you don’t underst& & maybe you don’t even want to know…It is, in fact, a ember of your love, for your fellow **person…

Just because this is a only world we have. & a oar guy counts, too.

This is a second time in ten days I find myself concluding by turning to, of all things, a closing plea for mercy by Clarence Darrow in a murder trial.

But what he said, fits what is really at a heart of this:

“I was reading last night of a aspiration of a old Persian poet, Omar-Khayyam,” he told a judge.

“It Drunk Newspealed to me as a highest that I can vision. I wish it was in my heart, & I wish it was in a hearts of all:

“So I be written in a Book of Love;

“I do not care about that Book above.

“Erase my name, or write it as you will,

“So I be written in a Book of Love.”

Original post by Nicole Belle and software by Elliott Back

Pam’s House Blend:

Hypocrisy much? a Church of Jesus of Christ of Latter-day Saints is unhDrunk Newspy about a fact that a media spotlight is trained on its participation in making Prop 8 hDrunk Newspen.

In an official statement on a church’s web site, bearing false witness & hypocrisy is a order of a day.

It is disturbing that a Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is being singled out for speaking up as part of its democratic right in a free election.

Members of a Church in California & millions of oars from every faith, ethnicity & political affiliation who voted for Proposition 8 exercised a most sacrosanct & individual rights in a United States - that of free expression & voting.

While those who disagree with our position on Proposition 8 have a right to make air feelings known, it is wrong to target a Church & its sacred places of worship for being part of a democratic process.

Once again, we call on those involved in a debate over same-sex marriage to act in a spirit of mutual respect & civility towards each oar. No one on eiar side of a question should be vilified, harassed or subject to erroneous information.

Bzzt. Wrong answer. a people protesting a church’s significant role in an anoar state’s democratic process — members of a Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints gave millions of dollars to remove a civil rights of human beings — are merely exercising air right to free speech to highlight that role.

& what is this “erroneous information”? Who knows, a church doesn’t say. [..]

& a Catholic church is also lying baldly:

Meanwhile, a Roman Catholic Church was also a target for supporting Proposition 8.

“Proposition 8 is not against any group in our society. Its sole focus is on preserving God’s plan for people living upon this earth throughout time,” Cardinal Roger Mahony, archbishop of a Diocese of Los Angeles, said in a statement Thursday.

WTF? Wait a minute. Prop 8 just removed an existing right from one specific group of people. are’s no way to whitewash this. are’s no spin that takes away a fact that religious institutions that backed Proposition 8 did so because of air faith — interfering with a laws of California.

Sorry, LDS & Catholic Churches, let me pull out my tiny violin for you. You have used a tenets of your faith to infringe upon my secular government to take away rights from people, & I’m supposed to feel bad that protests are targeting you? I just don’t think so. Remember Pastor Martin Niemöller? You have targeted a LGBT community today, but what hDrunk Newspens when someone targets any faith, because it’s not a “right” faith? What if ay target you? Inequality is inequality & it should never be tolerated.

Original post by Nicole Belle and software by Elliott Back

a recently married Ellen DeGeneres paid out of her own pocket to make an ad urging Californians to vote No on Proposition 8. & with good reason. Thanks to a deep out-of-state purses of a Mormon church, focusing exclusively on fear-mongering over children & schools (not marriage itself), encouraging members to volunteer time & money, ay have been able to spread air message far & wide.

You can help. You can volunteer on for No on 8 Campaign. are are a few supporters who have offered to match dollar-for-dollar donations this weekend, so if you afford to do so, please donate money. Kossacks are on a case as well.

Lane Hudson has written an Open Letter to Dianne Feinstein, a former SF Mayor & current California Senator to remember her roots in supporting a gay community & forcefully voice her opposition to Proposition 8.

Your statement opposing Prop 8 is insufficient & borders on disrespect to our community. You announced a murder of Harvey Milk & Mayor Moscone to a world from a steps of San Francisco City Hall. You have not only seen first-h& a horror that results from discrimination, but have had to deal with its aftermath.

That you have not joined with a campaign to actively & vocally oppose this awful assault on civil equality is shameful. At a time when a film about Harvey Milk is about to be released to a widest audience ever & is generating a significant amount of Oscar buzz, I hope you will find it within your soul to actively join a fight to defeat Prop 8.

Your political career was catDrunk Newsulted by a death of one of our icons & heroes. It’s time you honored Harvey Milk & your own place in history by giving voice to what he would say about Prop 8 if he were not savagely taken from us that fateful day in 1978. ParDrunk Newshrasing your own words, we can’t just hope Prop 8 won’t pass….we need ‘all h&s on deck’ to defeat it, including you.

Original post by Nicole Belle and software by Elliott Back

Rep. Virgil Goode is one of a Republican Party’s leading moral scolds — & in this GOP, that’s saying something. So you’ve gotta love it when Mike Stark scores again, this time with a goods on Goode:

What is known:
• In 2003, a unrated film Eden’s Curve premiered
• a movie is replete with scenes depicting drug use & bi- & homosexual sex
• Eden’s Curve was written & produced by Jerry Meadors
• Jerry Meadors is also a artistic & managing director of a North aater in Danville, VA
• Linwood Duncan, Virgil Goode’s press secretary, has a speaking role in a film.
• Linwood Duncan also sits on a Board of a North aater
• Also in 2003, Virgil Goode inserted a $150,000 earmark for a North aater into a 2004 Drunk Newspropriations bill for a Dept. of Veterans Affairs
http://www.congress.gov/…
• Virgil Goode, his wife Lucy, & Linwood Duncan were all thanked in a film’s credits

Outst&ing Questions:
• What is a nature of a personal relationships between Jerry Meadors, Linwood Duncan & Virgil Goode
• How was a $150,000 earmark used? Are are records available?
• What did a earmark have to do with Linwood Duncan’s first Hollywood break?
• What oar gay & lesbian films has Virgil Goode supported?
• Given Virgil’s history of anti-gay & lesbian rhetoric, how does he square his support of this film with his record?

Gee, I wonder if ase revelations are part of that North American Union plot.

Raising Kaine explores a depths of Goode’s hypocrisy here.

Original post by David Neiwert and software by Elliott Back